Locals prepare to gather signatures in effort to recall Councilmember Holly Blair

According to recall organizers, Blair was served earlier this week while she was near MIQ School during a car sale in the school’s parking lot.

According to one of the recall’s proponents, Rich Tuman, the effort has plenty of support. He said there are about 55 active participants involved in the process. Many of them joined Tuman on Sunday at his Lemoore home to discuss and plan the recall effort.

“We were trying to get it set up for the November ballot,” said Tuman, a longtime Lemoore area resident. “We’re not sure that’s going to happen. We have to have the signatures in by Aug. 6. In order to verify signatures. “We served her, and she has seven days to respond to that. If she responds with any type of rebuttal we have to put that on the paperwork.”

California has stringent recall regulations. According to the law, Blair has seven days to respond to the notice of intention after the recall supporters publish a proof of publication in a newspaper of general circulation. The notice was filed Wednesday in the Hanford Sentinel and it included 30 names. At the end of seven days proponents may begin collecting signatures. Recall proponents need 2,527 signatures, or 20 percent of Lemoore registered voters.

Tammie Alaniz, who served the notice, told The Leader has 120 days to get the recall effort on the ballot, whether this November or a special election.

“I am confident with the outpouring of support… from people I don’t even know, it’s going to be okay,” said Alaniz. “The city of Lemoore deserves better than the representation we’re receiving from her.”

Alaniz and Tuman confirmed that it was at the July 17 council meeting where Blair accused Lemoore Chief of Police Darrell Smith and Lemoore City Manager Nathan Olson of lying to her, inexplicably singling out Olson’s son and Smith’s daughter, that sparked their interest in a recall.

“I’ve been led to think a lot of things that aren’t true lately, and I just wanted to ask on the dais, because I can’t seem to get a straight answer otherwise,” stated Blair during the July 17 council meeting during an agenda item referred to as council comments. “Nathan, is it true that your and Darrell (Smith) are soon to be in-law? Is that true?”

Councilmembers objected, including Mayor Ray Madrigal who told her that her question was inappropriate. The mayor’s comment failed to stop Blair. Councilmember Dave Brown told Blair it was none of her business and the council’s Jeff Chedester urged her to end the matter.

Blair accused Smith of blatantly lying to her and demanded an investigation. “The reason I asked is that because you have lied to me twice, and I want to ask for an investigation in that some things I have said behind closed doors.”

Smith, visibly angry, told Blair to leave his family out of it. “I have never attacked you personally. I’ve never attacked your family,” he said angrily. He concluded that if he lived within the city limits, he would lead a recall effort.

Councilmembers, appearing fed up with Blair’s charges, gave the go-ahead to start a censure process and gave the city attorney the power to develop a process. The censure is likely to be on the next council agenda on August 7.

It was in an April council meeting that councilmembers threatened censure, describing Blair’s demeanor as conduct “unbecoming a councilmember.”